The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 23, 2006, 07:54 PM   #51
BreacherUp!
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2005
Posts: 566
Ok, I think the "lock the door" defense has been covered quite well, no? Jesus, the guy has already admitted to that mistake.
__________________
Life's tough. But it's tougher when you're stupid.
BreacherUp! is offline  
Old January 23, 2006, 07:58 PM   #52
choochboost
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 15, 2005
Location: orange county, ca
Posts: 610
I was just thinking the same thing!
choochboost is offline  
Old January 23, 2006, 09:01 PM   #53
bigautomatic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 18, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 610
This is why I have an alarm on my house. Not just as an alert to wake me up, or notify authorities (darn glad it does both) but also possible backup in court just in case (god forbid) things go bad in this type of situation. This why you need to know the law clearly in the state and city you live in. But for most, including me, at the wee hours of the morning with an intruder standing his ground, the law is probably the last thing on our mind. From the sounds of it you were very close to DOING WHAT YOU HAD TO DO. I for one am glad you didn't have to do what none of us want to do.
bigautomatic is offline  
Old January 23, 2006, 10:47 PM   #54
xjmox14x
Member
 
Join Date: January 21, 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 98
Have you ever considered purchasing a shotgun and getting some serious beanbag rounds? This way you won't have to make a life changing decision. If you're unsure, just pop him a couple times with it until he's incapacitated. If you made a mistake, it will heal...if not, then you'll be able to take control of the situation very fast. I would keep that handgun by my side though as a secondary weapon in case you need to get serious. However, this is something that you should consider.
xjmox14x is offline  
Old January 24, 2006, 04:01 PM   #55
Neophyte
Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 26
Quote:
However, this is something that you should consider.
Ack! No, no, no, no, no. Bad idea!

Beanbag rounds can and do kill, especially at across-the-room ranges. There's a reason they're now called "less-lethal" instead of "non-lethal" weapons - to keep LEOs and other users from assuming they can freely employ them with little danger to the target. "Popping" someone "a couple of times" at close range is a good way to end up with them getting severly injured or even dying in your hallway.

If you want a non-lethal option, use spray (not the best choice indoors!) or a TASER (expensive, and has arguably caused deaths as well).

Better yet, leave that stuff to the police. Shoot someone only if you are in genuine fear for your life.
Neophyte is offline  
Old January 24, 2006, 06:23 PM   #56
WhyteP38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Behind a keyboard.
Posts: 1,535
Just out of curiosity, since I know nothing about shooting bean bags from a shotgun, what happens when you run out of bean bags and the perp is not stopped? I remember reading a police report about some guy on PCP who cut slices of flesh from his own face and fed them to his dog. I'm thinking bean bags against someone like that won't be entirely successful. Do you then go for your pistol, which takes time to dump one weapon and grab another? Or do you have three bean bags and two live shotshells loaded? Or what if two or more perps are involved and you don't know it until you haul out the bean bag gun?

I'm just thinking bean bags are more appropriate when you have a much better idea of the entire situation, or for LEOs performing riot control functions and back up is available in case the bean bags don't get the job done.
WhyteP38 is offline  
Old January 24, 2006, 06:25 PM   #57
nscale
Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 67
Good Job

If this was my story it would go something like this...

"When I saw the guy I would have screemed so load it woulda sounded like a teenage girl in a horror film. I would have continued to screem at the top of my lungs as I emptied my weapon into the guy. Once he was dead (or I was out of ammo) I would have crumpled to the floor in a screemed out exhausted mess."

I am sure my screaming would start my wife and children screaming so everyone in the house would be screaming. Heck the bad guy might even have screamed. But I would swear my wife to silence and tell the story like I was calm and collected, in perfect control.

So phxdog you did good my friend. Even if you screamed
nscale is offline  
Old January 26, 2006, 09:41 AM   #58
xjmox14x
Member
 
Join Date: January 21, 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 98
"Ack! No, no, no, no, no. Bad idea!

Beanbag rounds can and do kill, especially at across-the-room ranges. There's a reason they're now called "less-lethal" instead of "non-lethal" weapons - to keep LEOs and other users from assuming they can freely employ them with little danger to the target. "Popping" someone "a couple of times" at close range is a good way to end up with them getting severly injured or even dying in your hallway.

If you want a non-lethal option, use spray (not the best choice indoors!) or a TASER (expensive, and has arguably caused deaths as well).

Better yet, leave that stuff to the police. Shoot someone only if you are in genuine fear for your life."


Very true, however, having someone severely injured in your hallway is the idea. I'm not arguing whether or not using beanbags is in fact the best decision, which you made a good argument to, I'm just stating that it will most likely eliminate the hesitation of making a life changing decision, which can, of course, go both ways. Also, if the intruder does in fact end up dieing, since you used beanbags rounds intended to stop, and not kill, it will most likely be brought up as manslaughter instead of murder, which should be easier to plead self defense.
xjmox14x is offline  
Old January 27, 2006, 11:27 PM   #59
LICCW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 25, 2005
Posts: 266
I wonder what Rebecca Peters :barf: and other anti-gun people would do in that situation. I always think anti-gun people are only anti-gun until they get a little dose of home invasion or car-jacking.
LICCW is offline  
Old January 28, 2006, 12:14 AM   #60
WhyteP38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 22, 2005
Location: Behind a keyboard.
Posts: 1,535
Seems like a lot of anti-gun people are anti-gun because they don't need them; only their bodyguards need them. I suppose that means only bodyguards should have guns, and so only people rich enough to have bodyguards have lives worth protecting. As for the rest of us ... well, we have no special talents that the world can't do without, such as acting or reading teleprompters. We're so common you can't throw a rock 10 feet without hitting one of us. A few less of us won't make that much difference.
WhyteP38 is offline  
Old January 28, 2006, 07:43 AM   #61
quinine
Junior Member
 
Join Date: January 28, 2006
Posts: 3
kinder gentler protectors?

You guys are much kinder than I would have been in this scenario.

And in a word yes, you were wrong..on multiple fronts.

First, there is no excuse for an unlocked home. With my wife and eight kids in the house, this could have turned out much worse.

A drunk guy is one thing but 2 real armed thugs could have changed this story dramatically.

The primary responsibility of the man of the home is to provide and protect his family.

The hands in the pocket, investigating without being armed, the firearm to well secured, etc.. all questionable judgements from my POV. I'm not trying to offend, but this is pretty important stuff.

I recently watched a special about a tribe in Africa that had just returned from a battle (read: defending thier families) and the men returned SINGING.

1 guy had killed 8 men in seperate battles and he & the tribe seemed fairly proud of that fact.


Compassion should be saved for those in dire need and your family. Not for a stranger unlawfully in your home...I wouldn't care why a stranger was in my home. Take every precaution to ensure the homefront is secure.

If you are unwilling to deal with a threat after that, maybe a saferoom with a phone is a good second choice.

Leaving the fam unprotected to face an unknown threat uarmed were indeed wrong actions.
quinine is offline  
Old January 30, 2006, 11:27 PM   #62
LICCW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 25, 2005
Posts: 266
WhyteP38: You are absolutely right. +1!
LICCW is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09155 seconds with 9 queries